If they are restricting some of the viable options, then it can't be the least restrictive path.

The free exercise clause is part of the 1st Amendment. Obama's contraception mandate is merely the current administration's regulatory interpretation of a statute. The two conflict, and the 1st Amendment wins. So says the Court

Explain it to me. Why the hell should anyone give a damn about this decision. Political geeks care because OBAMA, but why is this relevant to the average everyday working person?

I didn't read the rest of the thread - just responding to this. The shorthand is the court affirms ( sadly by only 1 vote ) that you don't have to give up your first amendment rights to own and operate a business. That shouldn't be news because it should be a given, but since it made it all the way to the SCOTUS - and only won by 1 vote - it is huge news.

I didn't read the rest of the thread - just responding to this. The shorthand is the court affirms ( sadly by only 1 vote ) that you don't have to give up your first amendment rights to own and operate a business. That shouldn't be news because it should be a given, but since it made it all the way to the SCOTUS - and only won by 1 vote - it is huge news.

It's a separation of powers case, that's the primary reason why people should care about it. The Obama administration continually rewrites or ignores statutory law or constitutional protections. The court slapped them down at least on this front.

For me, the worrying aspect about this ruling is that it was 5-4 and not unanimous. It was a pretty open and shut decision that had very little nuance IMO. To think that there are 4 constitutional 'scholars' on the highest court in the land that don't see this is pretty frightening.

The exchange between a CNN reporter and the plantiff's attorney outside the court house after the ruling was precious:

CNN: We heard the demonstrators today saying, “Look, the employers should stay out of our business,” that this decision will now essentially bring the employer into what should be a very private decision-making process between a woman and her doctor, now that the justices ruled that Hobby Lobby no longer has to cover four types of contraception. What do you have to say to the other side?

WINDHAM: Hobby Lobby would love to stay out of this, and leave this decision to a woman and her doctor. It’s the federal government that told them that they had to be involved and cover these things, even though they violated the Green family’s faith.

Exactly right.

__________________The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants

What's to stop companies from claiming they are Christian Scientists and opting out of providing insurance altogether?

Nothing. The point is, the government shouldn't be forcing companies to do anything. If a company can get employees to work for them without providing insurance, more power to them. The employees can get their own insurance. If they don't like it, work somewhere else. If the company folds because nobody wants to work for them, tough shit. But the government shouldn't be forcing anybody to be doing anything. That's kinda what the Constitution was getting at. But that's a tough ****ing sell in this gimme dat world.